Denard's rushing stats "tainted"?

if denard's running is so 'tainted' b/c he has an extra blocker, then by his logic all qb's should be running wild with this big advantage they would all have and ipso facto, that should be the most effective running scheme on the planet.   instead, denard's stats are other-worldly exactly because they are so beyond almost any other who ever played the game, regardless of school or era, and even amongst those whose sole job is to run the ball.

willing to bet your buddy never played the game, at least not much past junior high.  smack him one on the shoulder and make him buy you a beer for such a foolish argument.

LOINS OF FURY

Agree. Denard was basically cheating by being faster than all the other players. It would only be fair if they Harrison Bergeroned him with some ankle weights first.

Hell, I've even seen Tom Brady throw a block. Looks kinda stupid and weak, but they block sometimes.

His rushing stats shouldn't be compared that closely to RB stats, because he was a quarterback. That peanut make them any less impressive though.

Army, Navy, and AF are usually at the top of the nation's rushing stats each year. Should their stats mean less because they run the Triple Option?

you and your buddy should get some better pot.

 

Then the negative yardage on sacks should be taken out, a running back running behind a 2 TE set shouldn't count either.

I can't believe so many people responded to such a stupid argument...

I mean if you want question denard's stats you should point out that he piled up yards against shitty teams... that is what I hear from my spartan uncle all the time.  And that is an even dumber argument.

the stats are the stats...

 

If it's yours, then it seems like you're trying too hard to make him sound like a dick. Pretty much every comparison is going to have its limitations. One point I haven't seen mentioned is that RBs typically rotate out to stay fresh. That should boost their averages relative to Denard. 

a quick scan of the leading rushers in NCAA FBS history (http://www.fbsstatistics.com/careerrushingleaders.htm) show Denard at #47 ALL TIME (ahead of Dickerson, Campbell, and Bo Jackson, just to name three).  there are several names i don't recognize ahead of him yet no other quarterbacks jumped out at me.  he was the 47th best rusher of all time and he didn't even do the job full-time.  your buddy's argument is extremely narrow-minded.

Denard was a generational talent.  a serviceable (not great) passer that was hands down elite as a runner.  not many, if any, have come before him and we're not likely to see that production from a QB again, UM or otherwise.

Your friend is a "football purist"?  Which means what?  Tell him that all offensive records after 1950 are tainted since teams by this point had moved to two platoon football which meant offensive players weren't as tired by playing both ways, giving them an unfair advantage by comparison to offensive performances by players of earlier eras.  Tell him that passing records are tainted since the forward pass didn't emerge until the 20's, or scoring records are tainted because touchdowns used to count for 5 points instead of 6. 

Actually, make it easier on yourself and find better friends.

A football purist?? Fuck him and the horse he rode in on.. And some words to live by "never argue with a fool for a passer-by can never tell the difference."

They each have an equal number of blockers, QBs just usually bail on plays if they aren't involved. I'd bet RBs gain extra yards when the QB throws a block for them, obviously.

This is a ridiculous argument. Rushing yards are rushing yards. If he wants to talk about "unfairness" compare the lines Denard ran behind to the quality of the lines our backs ran behind for the previous, oh four decades and talk about unfair.

Never argue with an idiot; he'll drag you down to his level and win with experience.

Everyone here hates your friend

as well say any running who run an options numbers are tainted. Any time the QB can be a run threat he eliminates a defensive end or LB on an option which is the same as getting an extra blocker from a RB. So everyone is tainted just about, I would call your friend a taint and walk away.

your friend was trying to be argumentative! Because his argument is completely based in fiction. He obviously has no idea about what he's talking about.

option running schemes have been doing this type of thing for decades! The whole game is to unblock one person (a sneaky way of blocking, by not blocking) thus, gaining an extra blocker! So by his logic, any option RB/HB/FB has "tainted" stats....

There are numerous mitigating circumstances, good and bad, in every football statistic. 4 years of starting would've bolstered his stats. Denards rushing numbers would have been astronomical if his redshirt hadn't been burned, or if he had more than just occasional spot duty his first year, and if he wouldn't have sat for several games his senior year. They would've been techmo bowl numbers if he had played in the big east against weaker competition like pat white did.

You should have smiled, said "ok buddy" and walked away.

More productive to debate the origins of the universe with an evangelical. Do you take away a qb's passing yards if he plays in a spread passing system like Texas tech? System simply gives the player an opportunity. He still needs to produce. This is why ultimately, while records are nice, wins and losses are what players are judged on. A system will redistribute yards and production to different positions based on its focus. His point is valid, just offers no real merit or insight. What next? Debate the importance of those yards? He ran that distance, nobody can take that away from Denard. Were those yards ultimately more important for the team and its success as compared to Anthony Thomas or Chris perry or Tyrone Wheatley yards on their respective teams?...who the hell knows.

If that's the case, I say yards out of the wishbone don't count. They had more blockers out of the full house backfield.

On account of dumb.

When comparing players it's legitimate to consider scheme, talent of the rest of the players and the strength of opponents.  But, what's the difference b/n Denard running with an "extra" blocker against a one-high defense and a running back running against two deep safeties because they're afraid of getting burned deep?  

At the end of the day, it's probably impossible to measure and weight the relative advantages of scheme and talent.  What I would find as a persuasive shortcut, however, is to consider two stats:  1.) average yards after first contact; 2.) explosive plays as was considered in a post over the winter for the team as a whole, something like average yards after five yards down field.  Now, how you'd weight the two (Denard probably fairs worse than some of the best running backs on 1.) and well on 2.)) is something to ponder.

In the end, I don't think you can just judge Denard's yards as tainted and throw them out as if your standard is the same as a U.S. court deciding on rules of evidence.  Everything has to be compared to the other runners under consideration.

For everybody.

As far as I know, all Michigan running backs rushed against 11-man defenses on every play.  

Not to mention, Denard was keyed in on every play from 2010 on.

There were no advantages.

You should Denard him in the taint for that.

/struggling joke

The only even remotely controversial stat would be Denard's rushing yards as a QB, since the last few games he was really only listed at QB on paper and, because of his elbow, was really just a RB, especially in the bowl game.

oy.  Saturday cannot come fast enough.  Tell your friend that it is not your fault that Denard is half super hero.  Then you can discuss Miguel Cabrera and how his stats are inflated because he is tall or some other crazy reason. 

I don't know if "tainted" is the right word... But Denard, for the majority of his career, touched the ball on every single play. A RB does not...

It's an advantage any quarterback would have vs a running back, if I understand the argument right, because the RB will block for the QB but less likely the other way around.

But Denard's stats were exceptional *among QBs,*, all of whom presumably have this same strategic "advantage".

Therefore your friend is full of....malarkey.

Denard's rushing stats shouldn't be compared to those of a RB because Denard is a QB. Denard should be compared to other QBs. The only place Denard's rushing stats should be compared meaningfully to those of a RB is on the all-time leading rusher board. Denard is the 5th all-time leading rusher at Michigan. Which, being a career stat, is subject to many factors that are not related to ability and is therefore hard to interpret.

The word tainted is a perjorative that has no place in this discussion.

In conclusion, he ran for a lot of yards.

On the other hand how many times did Denard have no blockers in a passing situation and bust out for a big gain?  This guys argument is invalid.  Any rushing yards gained from the LOS are rushing yards in the record books.

Denard holds the QB rushing record in spite of the fact that for two years his coordinator either didn't know how to best use him or was trying to make him a different type of QB.  He holds the freaking record.  Your friend is an idiot.  I can't stand people who try to downgrade accomplishments based on external factors.  Every era is different and football coaches have always tried to exploit the defense with various strategies.  The single wing is a gimmick.  The wishbone is a gimmick.  The run n shoot, the spread option, the air raid, etc. etc. etc.  Using his logic everyone should have their stats thrown out in a magical "what if" game.  Guess what?  Denard was a great runner no matter what position he was in and the numbers reflect that.  Either realize that your friend is a troll who likely cheers for a rival school or pay him no mind because he obviously doesn't have a life.

Looks thoroughly debunked already, but I'll agree that rushing yards are rushing yards.  Nobody picks apart RBs who carry the ball 300+ times or play in run-happy offenses like Air Force or Army.  And I rarely hear the same argument about those passing attacks at Texas Tech and Purdue that used to put up video game numbers because they passed every down.

Denard earned every yard he picked up, and just because he had the RB sometimes blocking for him is a silly argument.